Changes

==Some other arguments against omniscience==

==Some other arguments against omniscience==

Philosopher Patrick Grim of SUNY Stoney Brook has argued that modern set theory disproves omniscience because there can be no single set of all truths.<ref>Moreland, J.P., Meister, Sweis, eds. ''Debating Christian Theism''. Oxford: OUP, 2013. Print. Pages 169-180.</ref> One way to answer this argument is by saying that God's nature transcends logic and math and therefore, as difficult as it may be to comprehend for our human minds, God is still omniscient and mathematical and logical laws do not apply to God. This somewhat similar to the defense which [[William of Ockham]] gave for the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

Philosopher Patrick Grim of SUNY Stoney Brook has argued that modern set theory disproves omniscience because there can be no single set of all truths.<ref>Moreland, J.P., Meister, Sweis, eds. ''Debating Christian Theism''. Oxford: OUP, 2013. Print. Pages 169-180.</ref> One way to answer this argument is by saying that God's nature transcends logic and math and therefore, as difficult as it may be to comprehend for our human minds, God is still omniscient and mathematical and logical laws do not apply to God. This is somewhat similar to the defense which [[William of Ockham]] gave for the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

==References==

==References==